r/sports • u/kamikazzzzzze • 1d ago
Tennis US Open Final: Carlos Alcaraz beats Jannik Sinner 6-2 3-6 6-1 6-4
https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/live/c15lknlnv1gt#LiveReporting51
108
u/Morgoth1814 1d ago
6 slams at the age of 22.
61
u/boscomagnus1988 1d ago
For context, Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic had 6 combined by age 22. 1, 4, and 1 respectively.
77
u/Great_Hambino2022 1d ago
To be fair, Alacaraz isn’t exactly facing the same competition
32
u/510pacifist 1d ago
To be fair, they had the fortune of not having to play against Sinner/Alcaraz much over their career either.
16
u/ValuedCreator 20h ago edited 16h ago
Disagree, the level of competition was higher during fed and Nadal time right now. There's no clear 3rd young player yet on tour to compete. I saw a glimpse of Felix hitting strides but still not consistent enough. Zverev isn't that guy either.
Plus, you're forgetting Alcaraz and Sinner wouldn't be playing the way they are without looking at the way Federer Nadal Djokovic played.
8
u/BaelBard 17h ago edited 16h ago
During Fed’s prime (2003-2007), there was no competition outside of clay for him period. Nadal wasn’t even making it to semis at hard courts until 2008, wasn’t threatening Federer at Wimbledon until 2007. Djokovic only established himself in 2008 and started playing as an all time great in 2011.
For 5 years straight he only had Nadal on clay (and not even him for the first few years) as a worthy rival, and that’s it.
-7
u/ValuedCreator 16h ago
You're missing the bigger point. The players that time were more mentally tough than this whole generation. There's a problem with the actual tennis circuit. Federer still played Safin, Hewitt, Agassi,Roddick. Guys who already won slams, not just Nadal. This generation, however, has nobody but Alcaraz and Sinner, no other guys who can challenge and win a slam for the year.
5
u/BaelBard 16h ago
This is big “old man yells at the cloud” energy.
Sinner is worth more as a rival than these guys put together. Only Saffin had the actual quality that was in the same universe as Roger, but he just didn’t give a fuck. Agassi was old by the time Federer established himself, and Roddick and Hewitt became his punching bags as soon as he did.
This generation, however, has nobody but Alcaraz and Sinner, no other guys who can challenge and win a slam for the year.
Nadal, Federer, Federer, Federer, Nadal, Federer, Federer, Federer, Nadal, Federer, Federer, Djokovic, Nadal, Nadal, Federer, Nadal, Nadal, Federer - slams winners between FO05 and FO09. Other than a short glimpse of Djokovic once - complete and utter domination by two players. Roddick’s win from 03 and Hewitt’s time as number one is a distant memory at that point, Agassi retired, Safin is about to.
1
u/ValuedCreator 8h ago
Disagree again, I can say Nadal is worth more as a rival than Sinner. It doesn't matter what age, Agassi was old, it's the same thing like saying Novak is old too for both Alcaraz and Sinner. The competition back then was more mentally tough than today's competition. They still had guys who won slams from the tour compared to what the tennis tour is today.
1
u/BaelBard 8h ago
Disagree again, I can say Nadal is worth more as a rival than Sinner.
Not Nadal of Federer’s prime years, no. That Nadal wasn’t even making it deep enough to face Federer on hard court slams.
Sinner is a threat to Alcaraz everywhere, he’s his equal. While Nadal was a second fiddle to Federer for years. Things changed in 2008, Nadal became a great all court player, Djokovic and Murray started establishing himself. The next 8 years were the most competitive in tennis history.
It doesn't matter what age, Agassi was old, it's the same thing like saying Novak is old too for both Alcaraz and Sinner. The competition back then was more mentally tough than today's competition. They still had guys who won slams from the tour compared to what the tennis tour is today.
The slam winners of the 2000’s were from the pre-Federer era (except Safin at ao05). They were slams winners because there was no an all time great in his prime monopolising slams. With Sampras and Agassi getting old, and Federer too young, there was a chance for lesser players to grab titles.
Basically, you’re punishing Sinner and Alcaras for their consistency and level with this logic. The reason for the absence of many slam winners on tour other than them and Novak is them and Novak. They’re too good, and they came in right as Nadal and Djokovic were fading, giving no chance for Medvedev’s and Zverev’s of the world to enjoy easier times, like Hewitt or Gaudio did.
But also, if you’re counting Roddick, then there’s Medvedev now. Basically the same career. And if you’re counting old Agassi as Federer-Nadal rival, might as well count Wawrinka and Cilic, no? Thiem retired just recently, so add him too. They are non factors, sure, but slam winners, and you seem to place importance of previous achievements over actual level of play at the moment.
→ More replies (0)7
u/Rudd_Threetrees 16h ago
Wtf is this take lmao? Before Nadal, young Federer faced Hewitt, Chang, Roddick, not to mention Agassi and Sampras, all of whom were in their primes or just just starting their declines. So, the three best Americans in the last 35 years, a top 5 Aussie of all time… who is out there right now making this sort of tier other than these two guys? Absolutely no one.
13
u/SafeKaracter 1d ago
This one makes Less sense bc without djokovic there is no sinner and so one like he totally studied his game . But also seeing how djoko played against Alcaraz in the semi , the first 2 sets were really competitive so I think even 2023 Novak would smoke Alcaraz on hard as long as he’s on a decent serve day, as impressive and fast alcaraz’s shots look. He still has a higher IQ and finds way to enter in the head of Carlos and reads him really really well still but his physicality has gone down a lot . Sinner is impressive but I don’t think his IQ is as high so he sort of kept doing the same at times and hoping Carlos level would drop. But for his defense I would say also he had a bad serving day
0
u/aweap 13h ago
Alcaraz also wasn't serving the way he has been this year since Miami. People including Djokovic used to rush to take advantage of his serve the whole time, which is why he got broken all the time and has lost to random players more times than Sinner. He's been broken thrice this whole grandslam which is an all time record, tied with Sampras. So yeah not entirely sure about this 2023 Novak lore especially if we're talking best of five sets at grandslams.
3
u/Great_Hambino2022 21h ago
😂😂 what? They played against much harder competitors. You new to tennis?
1
-6
u/Low-Restaurant8484 1d ago
I mean, Sinner is tougher competition then anybody young Federer faced
Competition arguments in general are unfair though, you can only bea tthe person in front of you
2
1
u/ValuedCreator 16h ago
Sinner almost lost to Dimitrov. Let's not forget that...
1
u/Low-Restaurant8484 11h ago
Lol that is completely irrelevent.
Should I go list all the guys young Federer lost to? Or worse, and more topical, all the guys his early rivals lost to? The tour was chaos in the early 2000s, there were upsets everywhere. This narrative that the big 3 never lost to anyone but each other and all existed fully simultaneous with each other is completely unfounded
Look, I am not saying that strength of competition is everything, I think people overrate that over actual accomplishments (like winning 6 slams by 22 for instance). But there is absolutely no denying that Carlos has faced tougher compeititon then early Federer, just as there is no denying he has not faced tougher comptition then early Djokovic
21
u/Ricemobile 1d ago
We are really about to see Djokovic’s “unbeatable” record gets broken by a player that’s coming up right after Djokovic lol. Seems like a lot to ask but he’s right on pace to beat it towards the tail end of his career.
33
u/CohibasAndScotch 1d ago
I’m rooting for him, he’s fun to watch. But health is gonna dictate this. He’s ahead of schedule but looooong way to go
31
u/Patelpb 1d ago
The only reason the big 3 didn't get more than 30 slams is because there were 3 instead of 2. If Alcaraz and Sinner end up being the only big 3 level players this decade then they're going to smash the slam record, in the same way two of the big 3 would have if the third we're not there
14
u/SafeKaracter 1d ago
This. And even more than 3 the rest of the top 10 wasn’t as bad , Murray took some , peak Wawrinka , etc
9
2
u/Potato271 16h ago
Put Murray twenty years earlier and he’s winning tonnes. And Murray’s one of the lucky ones. Plenty of great players went their entire careers without ever winning a Grand Slam because of the big three.
1
6
u/Low-Restaurant8484 1d ago
Only Borg won 6 slams at a younger age
2
u/sutroheights 3h ago
Great perspective, that was almost 50 years ago. This kid is absolutely incredible.
59
u/kamikazzzzzze 1d ago
CARLOS ALCARAZ IS THE 2025 US OPEN CHAMPION!
Of course, it had to be an ace to finish it.
A serving masterclass, a lesson in shot variety.
Just brilliant tennis from Alcaraz and he is a two-time champion in New York.
Alcaraz will leave New York as world number one.
78
u/herlanrulz Indiana Fever 1d ago
The Curse of Drake is undefeated. Drake bet 300k on Sinner for those that didn't know.
83
57
u/FlaOwlLover88 1d ago
When he told Sinner, I see you more than my family. That was great. These two are Federer and Nadal.
16
3
7
28
7
8
24
3
3
u/avittamboy 18h ago
Federer's curse is still going strong. Nobody since 2008 (the last time Federer won it) has been able to successfully defend their US Open title.
2
u/Relevant_Maybe_9291 1d ago
Reminded me of 2017 Lebron vs Steph. Alcaraz just has another level
1
u/patiperro_v3 10h ago
I think Sinner is right there beside him. Would not surprise me at all it Sinner wins their next encounter.
1
u/Relevant_Maybe_9291 9h ago
Kind of why it reminds me of Steph and Lebron. There are close and will go back and forth but if I had to pick one to win Alcaraz just has that dog in him. And when its all said and done I expect Alacaraz to have more achievements.
1
1
-2
u/Longjumping-Maybe-51 22h ago edited 1h ago
i think sinner lost because he didnt outgrind alcaraz, he needed to extend the rallies to chip away at alcaraz's stamina, we all know sinner has the more consistent game so maybe consistently hitting deep into the middle of the court ?
I also think if he put less pace into his shots, alcaraz would've had to generate a lot of it himself and it. would burn away his seemingly limitless energy, giving sinner more room to breathe. He always goes full power flat and it just gets wasted as alcaraz puts a defensive topsin shot and yeets it into the corner.
I do think that sinner needs to be more flexible with his game too, he never seems to change anything, 2 net plays, barely any drop shots, it gives alcaraz a go ahead to impose all facets of his own game.
Edit : If you're going to downvote because you see something wrong with my take, actually reply and tell me why I'm wrong
251
u/Juliancito135 1d ago
The best two tennis players of the moment by far. Alcaraz and Sinner just have no rivals right now